binocular wrote:I've seen neo-Buddhists who have the view that the brahmaviharas are not enough - in the sense that anger, hatred, contempt are wholesome attitudes that must also be practiced if one is to attain enlightenment.

Where on earth have you seen that view?

Like I said, from some neo-Buddhists, not big-style teachers or anything of that sort. I was caught completely off-guard, though, I did not expect that I would ever encounter a person who would make a point of calling themselves a Buddhist, claiming to know exactly what the Buddha knew, often going directly against the Pali Canon, claiming my references to the Pali Canon are dismissable. And that basically, they are the only real Buddhists, and everyone else who isn't like them, the actual monks and the tradition, are just plain wrong. And all this with so much hatred! I have felt physically assaulted just from their words, the energy in them was poisonous.

I mean - the experience of meeting such a person - that is scary, one of the scariest things I have ever experienced.How can someone talk so much about the Buddha - and yet have attitudes and behave in ways that have little or nothing to do with Buddhism as I know it.I don't know, and I was not prepared for this kind of challenge.

Reading about people who claim to be enlightened is one thing. Actually having to deal with them is something quite different.

I think we have to be realistic and not take exposure to the Dhamma as some sort of a panacea for lifetimes of delusion and bad habits.

So some people may have had no exposure to the Dhamma and yet be gentle, kind and wise. Others may have spent decades in temples and still behave in the way you've described. Even with an excellent teacher and exposure to true teachings, so much still depends on one's kamma. So I would not blame the teachings, because someone is not yet able to integrate them into their life. But we also may not know what that person was like before they encountered the Dhamma. Might've been much worse!

The way I understand Brahma Viharas is that they are second nature to Arahants. By practicing Brahma Viharas we (Puthujhana) are mimicking their behaviour and get an indirect experience with how arahants live their lives. Hence this will help us to fast track the progress of the path. I have witnessed that Brahma Viharas are practiced by non-Buddhist as well. This will greatly benefit the whole world including human, animal, Deva etc .

Dan74 wrote:So some people may have had no exposure to the Dhamma and yet be gentle, kind and wise. Others may have spent decades in temples and still behave in the way you've described. Even with an excellent teacher and exposure to true teachings, so much still depends on one's kamma. So I would not blame the teachings, because someone is not yet able to integrate them into their life. But we also may not know what that person was like before they encountered the Dhamma. Might've been much worse!

I'm not blaming the teachings, and to get back to the OP -Looking at the kind of people who tend to get ahead in the world, and also at some visible proponents of Buddhism (whatever they mean by that), it appears that a good dose of ill will is good and necessary.I think that at some point, a person trying to practice the brahmaviharas will have to resolve the issue that the brahmaviharas don't seem enough - don't seem enough due to doctrinal considerations, practical considerations, and real-world considerations.

binocular wrote:I'm not blaming the teachings, and to get back to the OP -Looking at the kind of people who tend to get ahead in the world, and also at some visible proponents of Buddhism (whatever they mean by that), it appears that a good dose of ill will is good and necessary.

It doesn't appear that way to me. I probably have some degree of idealistic tendencies, but the people I observe "getting ahead" by means of ill will, aren't actually "getting ahead" by any definition that I would accept. I see success in life coming to those who have positive qualities in line with what is expressed by the Brahma viharas. Those are the sort of people that everyone wants to be associated with, be around, assist and so on.

"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230

"When we transcend one level of truth, the new level becomes what is true for us. The previous one is now false. What one experiences may not be what is experienced by the world in general, but that may well be truer. (Ven. Nanananda)

“I hope, Anuruddha, that you are all living in concord, with mutual appreciation, without disputing, blending like milk and water, viewing each other with kindly eyes.” (MN 31)

binocular wrote:it appears that a good dose of ill will is good and necessary.

Hi Binocular, what do you mean?

Have you read the simile of the saw?

"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

binocular wrote:I'm not blaming the teachings, and to get back to the OP -Looking at the kind of people who tend to get ahead in the world, and also at some visible proponents of Buddhism (whatever they mean by that), it appears that a good dose of ill will is good and necessary.

It doesn't appear that way to me. I probably have some degree of idealistic tendencies, but the people I observe "getting ahead" by means of ill will, aren't actually "getting ahead" by any definition that I would accept. I see success in life coming to those who have positive qualities in line with what is expressed by the Brahma viharas. Those are the sort of people that everyone wants to be associated with, be around, assist and so on.

There are successful people who are like Bill Gates, for example. And then there are successful people who are like -- well, not to mention any names. You probably know what kind of successful people I mean - the kind of aggressive, ruthless business person. And ultimately, it appears it is this latter who prevail.

binocular wrote:I've seen neo-Buddhists who have the view that the brahmaviharas are not enough - in the sense that anger, hatred, contempt are wholesome attitudes that must also be practiced if one is to attain enlightenment.

Where on earth have you seen that view?

Like I said, from some neo-Buddhists, not big-style teachers or anything of that sort. I was caught completely off-guard, though, I did not expect that I would ever encounter a person who would make a point of calling themselves a Buddhist, claiming to know exactly what the Buddha knew, often going directly against the Pali Canon, claiming my references to the Pali Canon are dismissable. And that basically, they are the only real Buddhists, and everyone else who isn't like them, the actual monks and the tradition, are just plain wrong. And all this with so much hatred! I have felt physically assaulted just from their words, the energy in them was poisonous.

I mean - the experience of meeting such a person - that is scary, one of the scariest things I have ever experienced.How can someone talk so much about the Buddha - and yet have attitudes and behave in ways that have little or nothing to do with Buddhism as I know it.I don't know, and I was not prepared for this kind of challenge.

Reading about people who claim to be enlightened is one thing. Actually having to deal with them is something quite different.

Was this something you heard by followers of "kentucky fried buddhism"?

binocular wrote:Looking at the kind of people who tend to get ahead in the world, and also at some visible proponents of Buddhism (whatever they mean by that), it appears that a good dose of ill will is good and necessary.I think that at some point, a person trying to practice the brahmaviharas will have to resolve the issue that the brahmaviharas don't seem enough - don't seem enough due to doctrinal considerations, practical considerations, and real-world considerations.

This is wrong view binocular. You are confusing advancement in the 'real-world' with advancement in the dhamma; the two are not the same. There is a reason that the Buddha prescribed the path of monasticism. Our goal should be to progress spiritually rather than materially, which, after all, is all the 'real-world' can offer.